Officer with a past now suing city

Wednesday

Feb 27, 2013 at 6:00 AM

Clive McFarlane

Former Worcester police lieutenant Tim O’Connor, who was among several police officers fingered for allegedly manipulating or manufacturing court overtime to boost their earnings, is suing the city, claiming damage to his reputation, loss of economic opportunities and his ability to continue working in his profession.

The case dates back to 2008, when an internal police department investigation alleged that seven police officers, including Mr. O’Connor, had manipulated the department’s schedule and their vacation days to maximize court overtime. The investigation also found instances where officers did not appear in court on days they said they did.

According to city officials, the seven officers in the first six months of 2008 shared $80,000 to $100,000 in total court overtime earnings. Several of the officers paid restitution of about $45,000 and were reassigned. One officer resigned. Mr. O’Connor filed for disability and retired with an annual tax-free pension of about $78,000.

This seems to be a bargain, considering what could have happened to him, had he been a regular Joe. Most people might have faced a felony rap, notwithstanding the state attorney general’s decision not to file criminal charges.

An Internal Affairs investigation concluded that Mr. O’Connor lied in his reports to investigators, presenting fraudulent overtime slips for payments when he was neither listed on the official court agenda, summoned by the court, or requested to appear by an official assigned to the court.

Additionally, Mr. O’Connor retired on disability, despite statements from the city that seemed to imply that his disability was manufactured. He was diagnosed with an irregular heartbeat on July 25, 2008, and turned in an injured on the job report on July 29, the same day Chief Gary Gemme placed him on administrative leave.

The city wrote on Mr. O’Connor’s disability application that his injury was the “result of…misconduct on his part,” and that Mr. O’Connor could have returned to duty without requiring any accommodations.

Mr. O’Connor’s lawyer, Rebecca Pontikes of Boston, argues that her client “was following a well-known and accepted practice which had existed for years, and which was known and condoned” by the chief.

If that was the case, it’s hard to imagine why Mr. O’Connor didn’t fight to keep his job, but instead signed a confidentiality agreement that compelled him “to forfeit over $20,000, his position as a lieutenant,” and to agree never to seek employment with the city.

As part of the agreement, the city promised to drop and rescind all charges, and tell third parties inquiring about the court overtime case only that all issues “have been resolved and concluded” to the city’s satisfaction.

The city, the suit claims, breached the agreement by making statements to the media that stigmatized Mr. O’Connor as a criminal.

The city has not yet responded to the suit, but Chief Gemme called it frivolous and an attempt by Mr. O’Connor to “revise the history of his involvement in this matter.”

“The record is quite clear, no other police official in the department engaged in the type of egregious behavior and collected unwarranted compensation in the way Mr. O’Connor manipulated his court overtime,” he said.

If that is this case, Mr. O’Connor would seem to be biting the hand that has made it possible for him to sit on the beach all day, if he chooses, and still pull in his tax-free $78,000 annually. But he’s not.

He’s only trying, I believe, to maximize his opportunities in this current system of public accountability, where questionable deeds often bring rich rewards, instead of punishment.